Re: Troy - sigh

From: Roderick and Ellen Robertson <rjremr_at_...>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 22:54:17 -0700


> If you are objecting to Peter Jackson not lovingly recreating
> Tolkiens authentic '40s sexism and relegating all but one of the
> female characters actions to the appendix, you might be the sort of
> Tolkien fan that, well, really objects to Tolkien being made into
> GOOD films.

I'd like the LotR to be made into a good film. I really would. Jacksonm came close, but screwed up too many times.

I object to a group of people that claim to be "true to the original", who then *add* irrelevant scenes, and change motivations. I can understand deleting poor old Tom and Goldberry, but why screw around Aragorn's motivations? He knew (in the book) that he was the king, and he had worked at it for many, many years. None of this "He forsake it" crap. And Faramir? He is almost 180 degrees from his book portrayal, and makes no sense whatesoever, especially after he lets Frodo go immediately after Frodo A) Almost gives the ring to the Nazgul (whether as an offering, or by putting it on) and B) almost kills Sam *in a scene that was never in the book*.

Sorry, but the Arwen scenes did nothing for feminism, or for the movie. PJ & Co may have wanted a lead female for the women in the audience to relate to, but they were busy swooning over the hunks (Elijah, Vigo, Orlando, Sean...). She comes off as a petulant, whiney brat. And it was only after massive protests was she removed from the Helms Deep scenes (sometimes with re-shoots, sometimes digitally).

Did Lawrence of Arabia suffer buy not having a female lead? Let's re-make it with Faisal's sister riding with Lawrence in disguise. Yeah, that ought to advance the cause!

> >And Odysseus would
> >get cut, as would Ajax the Lesser. And Hector would have his motivations
all
> >screwed up and take the hobbits to Osgiliath...
>
> Which might actually be truer to Homer than cutting all the
> gods out in any case.
> But are you one of these people that is upset because they
> cut Tom Bombadil just because he was an irritating irrelevancy?

Nope, I object to adding crappy scenes when you're already over time-budget. Hobbits in Osgiliath? Warg Attack? Aragorn in the river? Frodo telling Sam to go home? For this shit we lost the Faramir-Eowyn romance? We had to make do with Theoden at Helm's Deep instead of Eomer? We had to cut Tom & Goldberry & Old Man Willow and the Barrow Downs and the Wights and the Blades of Westerness? We lost the scouring of the shire?

Sorry, but I am *not* the biggest PJ fan. He screwed around with the source material while loudly proclaiming his "authenticity". At least he didn't do as badly as "Francis Ford Coppola's Bram Stoker's Dracula".

RR
It is by my order and for the good of the state that the bearer of this has done what he has done.
- Richelieu

Powered by hypermail